Literature DB >> 23650999

How do foragers decide when to leave a patch? A test of alternative models under natural and experimental conditions.

Harry H Marshall1, Alecia J Carter, Alexandra Ashford, J Marcus Rowcliffe, Guy Cowlishaw.   

Abstract

A forager's optimal patch-departure time can be predicted by the prescient marginal value theorem (pMVT), which assumes they have perfect knowledge of the environment, or by approaches such as Bayesian updating and learning rules, which avoid this assumption by allowing foragers to use recent experiences to inform their decisions. In understanding and predicting broader scale ecological patterns, individual-level mechanisms, such as patch-departure decisions, need to be fully elucidated. Unfortunately, there are few empirical studies that compare the performance of patch-departure models that assume perfect knowledge with those that do not, resulting in a limited understanding of how foragers decide when to leave a patch. We tested the patch-departure rules predicted by fixed rule, pMVT, Bayesian updating and learning models against one another, using patch residency times (PRTs) recorded from 54 chacma baboons (Papio ursinus) across two groups in natural (n = 6175 patch visits) and field experimental (n = 8569) conditions. We found greater support in the experiment for the model based on Bayesian updating rules, but greater support for the model based on the pMVT in natural foraging conditions. This suggests that foragers may place more importance on recent experiences in predictable environments, like our experiment, where these experiences provide more reliable information about future opportunities. Furthermore, the effect of a single recent foraging experience on PRTs was uniformly weak across both conditions. This suggests that foragers' perception of their environment may incorporate many previous experiences, thus approximating the perfect knowledge assumed by the pMVT. Foragers may, therefore, optimize their patch-departure decisions in line with the pMVT through the adoption of rules similar to those predicted by Bayesian updating.
© 2013 The Authors. Journal of Animal Ecology © 2013 British Ecological Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bayesian updating; habitat predictability; learning; marginal value theorem; patch‐departure‐rules; primate

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23650999     DOI: 10.1111/1365-2656.12089

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Ecol        ISSN: 0021-8790            Impact factor:   5.091


  12 in total

1.  Information from familiar and related conspecifics affects foraging in a solitary wolf spider.

Authors:  Catherine R Hoffman; Michael I Sitvarin; Ann L Rypstra
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2015-10-26       Impact factor: 3.225

2.  Testing optimal foraging theory in a penguin-krill system.

Authors:  Yuuki Y Watanabe; Motohiro Ito; Akinori Takahashi
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2014-01-29       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Prey encounters and spatial memory influence use of foraging patches in a marine central place forager.

Authors:  Virginia Iorio-Merlo; Isla M Graham; Rebecca C Hewitt; Geert Aarts; Enrico Pirotta; Gordon D Hastie; Paul M Thompson
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2022-03-02       Impact factor: 5.349

4.  Unpacking chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) patch use: Do individuals respond to food patches as predicted by the marginal value theorem?

Authors:  Lisa R O'Bryan; Susan P Lambeth; Steven J Schapiro; Michael L Wilson
Journal:  Am J Primatol       Date:  2020-10-28       Impact factor: 2.371

5.  Social effects on foraging behavior and success depend on local environmental conditions.

Authors:  Harry H Marshall; Alecia J Carter; Alexandra Ashford; J Marcus Rowcliffe; Guy Cowlishaw
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2015-01-04       Impact factor: 2.912

6.  Using a partial sum method and GPS tracking data to identify area restricted search by artisanal fishers at moored fish aggregating devices in the Commonwealth of Dominica.

Authors:  Michael Alvard; David Carlson; Ethan McGaffey
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-02-03       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Bayesian decision making in human collectives with binary choices.

Authors:  Víctor M Eguíluz; Naoki Masuda; Juan Fernández-Gracia
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-04-13       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Trust your gut: using physiological states as a source of information is almost as effective as optimal Bayesian learning.

Authors:  Andrew D Higginson; Tim W Fawcett; Alasdair I Houston; John M McNamara
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2018-01-31       Impact factor: 5.349

9.  Information use and resource competition: an integrative framework.

Authors:  Alexander E G Lee; James P Ounsley; Tim Coulson; J Marcus Rowcliffe; Guy Cowlishaw
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2016-02-24       Impact factor: 5.349

10.  Baboon thanatology: responses of filial and non-filial group members to infants' corpses.

Authors:  Alecia J Carter; Alice Baniel; Guy Cowlishaw; Elise Huchard
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2020-03-11       Impact factor: 2.963

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.